For those of us who have the good fortune to be from a state as rich in natural beauty as Wisconsin, it would be impossible not to care about conservation.In 2011, we received positive news from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — the gray wolf, once critically endangered, had finally bounced back and no longer required the protection of the Endangered Species Act. For many of us in Wisconsin, the wolf's recovery was already obvious, as they were seen more and more frequently around our homes and communities, sometimes unfortunately clashing with pets and livestock.Finding the right balance between conservation and safety for people and animals requires careful science and years of study, and the Fish & Wildlife Service has teams of highly trained people who dedicate their careers to getting these questions right. In 1978, the gray wolf was listed as endangered and put under the protection of the Endangered Species Act. Through the successful population management of the Fish & Wildlife Service, wolves have experienced an unprecedented comeback.The Endangered Species Act, a huge step taken by America to protect biodiversity, was designed to be an intensive recovery initiative, not a permanent population manager. When the law is most successful, it results in a species being removed from the endangered species list. The gray wolf population rebound in Wisconsin and other affected Great Lakes states is a success story that should have allowed population management to be transferred from the federal Endangered Species Act back to state and local control for long-term maintenance.Unfortunately, it hasn't proven that simple. Through an activist judge's ruling to reverse the decision of the Fish & Wildlife Service, gray wolves were relisted as an endangered species, in spite of the best science available. People far from understanding the facts of the case or how our communities work have jumped into the argument, making claims based on emotion and not data and cheapening the hard science that the Fish & Wildlife Service spent decades compiling. Substantial amounts of money are being spent on litigation that would be far better spent on doing the work that both sides are committed to doing: preserving biodiversity.Responding to numerous requests from constituents, I authored HR 884, http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c114:H.R.884:a short and simple bill that would allow the decision of the Fish & Wildlife Service to delist the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act to stand.It does not alter the Endangered Species Act in any way, nor does it impede the Fish & Wildlife Service from relisting the gray wolf again in the future. The bill has bipartisan support from members of Congress in all of the affected Great Lakes states and Wyoming, which are experiencing the same issue. HR 884 simply allows the decision of this dedicated team of scientists to be followed.At the end of the day, our goal is to do the best we can by the world we have. We want to protect people, preserve animals and ensure that our world is in good condition to hand down to our children and grandchildren. Though the argument around the gray wolf has sometimes become a heated one, each group involved is invested in preserving a healthy wolf population.It is my belief that allowing trained professionals to make decisions based on years of research is the best path forward in achieving that goal, and my legislation, HR 884, would do just that.Reid Ribble is a Republican member of Congress representing Wisconsin's 8th District.